Jack Watts out of contract at the end of the year

[jnrmac 20,059]

yes. Watts' contract renewal should see him get enough as required for his 3rd season onwards, no more.

Watts should get what a good potential but developing player should get. With incentive payments for B&F votes etc.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

One thing is certain though, the greats of any era had earmarked their greatness at a relatively young age - which is the point I continue to make and the one that seems hardest to grasp around here.

I agree with this. There are players who take time to reach their "star" status... Hodge being an example... someone like Montagna being another although a rung down. But they are VERY rare. After their first 2 and MAYBE 3 years you know 90% of what you're ever going to know about a player. Next year will tell us a HELL of a lot about Scully and Trengove for example who could quite easily turn out to be the best demons of the next 10 years. Maybe longer.

I remember when the Naita/Watts debate was raging here a couple of years ago, and you were surprisingly adamant about getting Jack to the club. You're been wrong on occasion before.... (we all have been, when you make enough predictions, some have to turn out wrong) and I remember at the time thinking you really were quite invested in the kid. Being very considered about your approach both to footy analysis AND posting, I thought at the time there was something in this. I reckon it wouldn't be too far from the truth to suggest that many 'landers followed your line of thinking, as these sites are all we have to go on, and quality posts and self expression, coupled with insight is rare.

So it surprises and interests me quite a bit to see you pressing the "next stop" button on the Jack Watts bandwagon.

What I'd be interested to see is the comparison, in your opinion H, of Watts to someone like Sylvia. Set aside the fact they're different types and have had different histories with injury...

First, Sylvia. What was it you said a couple of years ago that caught my eye... he's "just a player." Do you still stand by this? I think come the end of his career, yes, that may be how he's classed. But his best is a lot better than a Farren Ray-type "just a player." His worst footy kind of evens him out and puts him back in the pack. But since the days you repeatedly classed him in this way, has your opinion changed? Do you need to see more? When he showed his glimpses last year, and his early season sparkling form this year were you more confident?

Secondly, Watts. Knowing what we now know about Sylvia (and yes, I'm aware his injuries curtailed his first 5 years)... Are you given hope by Col's example of what can happen when a player is persisted with?

Furthermore... what would it take from Watts to get your confidence back? Given it's only this last 4 weeks that have seen you turn, how many weeks of good footy would it take for you to gain a bit of confidence in him again?

I hate to hang it all on one stat, but in this case I think it's justified. He's played 9 career games (6 this year) for 6 goals (4). If he can get his goal/game average up to over 1, I think It'd be enough for me to wait until next year before jumping on his back. That would involve kicking 15+ goals in the last 9 games, which would likely mean he'd have to kick a bag or two of 4, given we'll be playing the Saints, Freo and a couple of other tough sides.

I don't reckon it's beyond the realms of possibility. It all depends on where he plays and how he's going about getting them, be it on the lead or as frees. If he's running far and wide outside the fifty, something I think he'll end up spending large chunks of his career doing, then perhaps I should be asking for a bit less. But I reckon once he gets in close, his kick is superb on both sides, so there's no reason why he shouldn't pick up cheap goals from frees and the like.

I have a suspicion you couldn't give a stuff about stats, since they don't indicate "stardom." Even so, are there any criteria Watts could achieve to get him off your hit list?

[beelzebub 23,350]

Just so there's no confusion, I make no reference to "trading him", and nor do I talk about "how long to persevere".

My comments purely refer to the chances of him being a bona fide "great of the game", or as some say "star". I think at worst he'll become a good player. He's coming from a fair way back if he's going to be a great of the game, which is why he was drafted. We need him to become a star to win a flag, imo.

not for a moment sugesting YOU are... I am.. I agree that next year is a make or break of sorts. I agree wholeheartedly that true ability wil have shone through by end of next season and if he is indeed demonstrating improvement then all well and good. If he's languishing and not moving ahead then 2012 might be his last in red and blue. Hnece my question of how long ? we have made many an eror as a team over the jorney by holding on to some players who oozed promise and delivered 50c on the dollar. Im quite happy to suggest if he isnt delivering on the clubs investment then we need to trade him whilst some other outfit may see some avenues that we havent.

Now before some jump to the conclusion Im advocating moving him on willy nilly thats not the case at all and will show you havent read it all . I still think he ( Watts ) wil come good . Hes a raw-ish and still not quite at home (mentally ) at this level. Hopefully as he grows and fills , together with stringing patches into games his confidence will rise and output allign with expectations.

Im not suggesting he needs to have "made" it by next seasons end..I would suggest he would need to be getting much better..and again follow up with more improvement in 2012 .

As Hannabal suggests and I agree again some greats of the game had already stamped their presence by now. We will have to wait a bit longer.

[Hannabal 4]

I remember when the Naita/Watts debate was raging here a couple of years ago, and you were surprisingly adamant about getting Jack to the club. You're been wrong on occasion before.... (we all have been, when you make enough predictions, some have to turn out wrong) and I remember at the time thinking you really were quite invested in the kid. So it surprises and interests me quite a bit to see you pressing the "next stop" button on the Jack Watts bandwagon.

What I'd be interested to see is the comparison, in your opinion H, of Watts to someone like Sylvia. Set aside the fact they're different types and have had different histories with injury...

First, Sylvia. What was it you said a couple of years ago that caught my eye... he's "just a player." Do you still stand by this? I think come the end of his career, yes, that may be how he's classed.

Watts has talent that I've rarely seen in a key tall forward, but there was always one question mark; and I've said enough on that. At worst I reckon he'll be a good player, so I haven't really "gone off him".

Winning a flag is the only reason I follow footy. It's the only thing that matters to me. And knowing how hard they are to win I knew how important the super draft of 08 was. The [censored] that frequent footy forums get up in arms about calling players messiahs and state how unfair it is to pin such high hopes on a young player, but the reality is that if we're to win a flag it is going to be on the back of a couple of stars and a number of A graders. Imo, Watts needs to be a border line star for us to win a flag, which, as stated, is all I care about. So yes, I was invested in that pick and that draft. As a club we really are in need of those first 3 picks to be players and for various reasons there still are question marks on all three.

As for Sylvia ? I did say he was "just a player". I also said that his best role could be as a "finisher". I don't see any great midfield qualities in Sylvia, but I do see a player that could become a good finisher, who has the occasional rotation in the midfield. And once again, for varying reasons, he's having a disappointing year.

Edited June 30, 2010 by Hannabal

[Hannabal 4]

not for a moment sugesting YOU are... I am..

Yes, I knew what you meant. I just wanted to make sure that others didn't misinterpret your clumsy scribblings.

[beelzebub 23,350]

Yes, I knew what you meant. I just wanted to make sure that others didn't misinterpret your clumsy scribblings.

mate..youre doing well without the needless commentary. Take the tickets off ya self

[fired up 77]

Dont rate him, quite simply Melbourne made wrong choice.

We dont need players to be good in 4 years we need them now.

But if i'm proven wrong i'll quite happily eat my words, dont think so though.

[e25 5]

We dont need players to be good in 4 years we need them now.

Possibly the most ridiculous statement i've read on this forum... and there have been some killers.

Words... can't...

Just... WOW.

[Felix 92]

Possibly the most ridiculous statement i've read on this forum... and there have been some killers.

Words... can't...

Just... WOW.

ahhh. the dill who said MFC could make top FOUR surely would come close to that.

[e25 5]

ahhh. the dill who said MFC could make top FOUR surely would come close to that.

Mmmmm... yeah, we'll add that to the list too.

Was that me? Wouldn't be surprised.

But the other comment is... mind boggling.

[Felix 92]

Mmmmm... yeah, we'll add that to the list too.

Was that me? Wouldn't be surprised.

But the other comment is... mind boggling.

was not you & I agree with your sentiments.

Back to Jack Watts, HE NEEDS TIME, IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND, or is this forum packed full of Collingwood supporters..

[e25 5]

was not you & I agree with your sentiments.

Back to Jack Watts, HE NEEDS TIME, IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND, or is this forum packed full of Collingwood supporters..

Yeah, I have to agree, Watts wasn't part of the exceptionally small percentage of players that are drafted to perform in their SECOND year as opposed to being a long term prospect.

But, hey... I see not everyone subscribes to this theory.

He/she may be alone though.